Monday, 3 December 2018

[DQ in Rural Rep Election] Eddie Chu Hoi-dick’s response after being DQed from running 2019 rural ordinary election

Eddie Chu Hoi-dick’s response to English press after being disqualified from running 2019 rural ordinary election, 2 December 2018
 
Reporter: (on whether returning officer’s decision is reasonable, whether he is worried about his political career and whether he will take any legal actions)

Chu: Well, first of all, in my previous letter to the returning officer, I stated clearly that he does not have the right for political right based on the interpretation of Article 104 of the Basic Law and the judgment of election petition of Chan Ho-tin. He did not reply a single word on this particular issue. And secondly, I want to tell my fellow citizens that the problem right now, or the political censorship right now, is not only … one needs to declare not supporting HK independence, but one also needs to reject the right of other people’s freedom of speech in order to gain a right to run this rural representative election. I think this is absurd and it is in violation of the Basic Law. It also signifies a very dangerous trend of political censorship, among not only participants of election but fellow citizens. Concerning my political career, at this stage, I will continue to be a legislator to serve the Hong Kong citizens. And I will seize any chance and any role within the democratic campaign to contribute in this common cause.

Thursday, 29 November 2018

Ching Wing See: This is What You Asked For

Ching Wing See: This is What You Asked For
Translated by Gordon, written by Ching Wing See
Original: https://www.facebook.com/Cemetery.News.page/photos/a.729801777127442/2132354740205465/? 

This morning, some people have been mourning over the loss of Lee Cheuk-yan in the by-election, claiming it as “the fall of Hong Kong”. Meanwhile, some commentary claimed that localist opinion leaders (such as myself) have been the worst, as we advocated for a “scorched-earth”/”kamikaze voting” strategy and dissuaded voters from supporting pan-democrat candidates, resulting in the loss.
What are the facts? There are several of them. For starters, in new public housing estates such as Tak Long and Kai Ching, Lee Cheuk-yan yielded way fewer votes than Chan Hoi-yan, who was backed by CCP’s propaganda machine and election manipulation mechanism, which means that the gerrymandering done by the Liaison Office and Hong Kong Government has been effective. As pan-dems such as Lee himself welcomed Chinese immigrants with open arms and advocated for their access to public housing, the situation today is but the result of what they had previously planted, and has nothing to do with others.
Secondly, the mechanism for pan-democrats’ campaign propaganda has come to an end. On the election day, 3 newspapers voiced their support for Chan, much like what the Apple Daily would do for Lee, but due to the difference in the make-up of readers (and let’s not bother to discuss those of Ta Kung Pao and Wen Wei Po), Apple Daily failed to operate like Oriental Daily. Oriental’s day-to-day coverage on small government handouts and vulnerable groups, as well as their mocking of university students, all appeal to the aesthetics and ideologies of HK’s blue-collar workers. Whereas to assume all blue-collar are pro-establishment would be a slippery slope, it is, however, an easy job for Oriental Daily to lead the masses into hating a self-aggrandizing and incompetent union leader. Despite the fact that Apple Daily readers are also the most vocal ones to interact on the Internet and can hardly be manipulated by media, Apple Daily wouldn’t stop rooting for unpresentable candidates. No matter how decent they seem at first, Apple’s Choices either slowly fade into oblivion, like Joshua Wong, or are simply an embarrassment to start with, such as Alvin Yeung. To put forward candidates like such almost amounts to announcing the death of the campaign in the entire election. Some pan-dems, such as Longhair Leung, even went to the depth as to provoke and taunt undecided voters. Such electoral suicide reflects pan-dems’ complacency and refusal to learn.
Thirdly, these politicians are unbearably annoying to start with to the point they almost call for a beating. Both Lee and Frederick Fung were sellouts to HK people on various political issues, and they fail to manifest any passion and dedication in their day-to-day community service. These numerous notorious incidents have been deeply embedded in our memories. As the colloquial term say it, the reason why we “vote with tearing eyes” is because even their usual supporters find them simply unpalatable. If a political sector who needs to run for campaigns have run out of choices but old useless candidates, then it’s simply announcing its doom and demise, especially during the times where the youth struggle to find a place and are at odds with useless old bums. As they approach retirement age, instead of competing with youngsters and embarrassing themselves, how about being supportive to youth and taking up mentoring roles?
Lastly, if one seeks help, one should remain humble, especially for politicians, whose role is but to appeal to the masses. They need to stop bickering with voters; otherwise they might end up seeking employment service themselves.

Wednesday, 10 October 2018

Hong Kong Didn’t Even Show up in Pence’s Speech: Whose Fault Is This?

Hong Kong Didn't Even Show up in Pence's Speech: Whose Fault Is This?
Translated by Gordon, written by Lewis Loud
Original: Hong Kong Didn’t Even Show up in Pence’s Speech: Whose Fault Is This? 


Mike Pence, Vice President of the US, Source of photo: Internet
Mike Pence, the Vice-President of the United States, delivered a stinging speech about China at the prestigious Hudson Institute, with every paragraph pinpointing at every flaw of China. Starting off by retelling the story where the US has supported China for the last century, the speech depicts China’s betrayal amidst and despite the US’ benevolence; as the speech unfolds, it sounds as if the US is giving an ultimatum to China before launching a full-out attack. This U-turn of policy bears a striking resemblance to what was laid down in Michael Pillsbury’s book: The Hundred-Year Marathon.

What's more unsettling is that, whereas Pence's speech did mention many countries, Hong Kong (HK) was completely left out of it. While it is true that US-HK Policy Act still remains in effect, such is no guarantee of peace during turbulent times like these. Today, the Foreign Correspondents’ Club (FCC) is facing political oppression from the HKSAR government, as Financial Times journalist and FCC Vice President Victor Mallet’s working visa has been rejected, as a payback for hosting a talk by Andy Chan, Chairman of the Hong Kong National Party (HKNP). The act of terminating of Mallet’s visa amounts to sending him in exile. The HKSAR Government, by its conduct, revealed the fact that Hong Kong is no longer a free port nor an international metropolis, but instead “another Chinese city”. China has been in breach of the Sino-British Joint Declaration and Basic Law for a long time, and such conduct has been understood by the US. Sooner or later, if not already the case, HK will be seen as an accomplice of China, and there would be no way we can stay out of it once the US decides it’s payback time.

Just a month ago, HKNP wrote to President Trump, claiming that HK had suffered a total loss of its autonomy, thus asking the US to review US-HK Policy Act, as well as to revoke HK and China’s respective WTO memberships. Back then, quite a lot of criticisms came from the political and business sectors, saying that this would send HK to its demise. On the other hand, Alan Leong, a senior member of the pan-democrats, issued a high-profile rebuttal through Apple Daily, stating his disagreement over the claim that HK has suffered a total loss of autonomy, and claimed that HKers should “persuade” the Chinese Communist Party to act according to Sino-British Joint Declaration and Basic Law…

As we can never tell whether Leong's seeming nveté was genuine, there is little need to comment such an act. Given, however, that the pan-democrats have occupied so many seats in the LegCo, Victor Mallet’s incident is in turn a reflection for what they have achieved so far amidst such political reality: ZERO.

Let us look deeper into it. The US’ grievance over China stems from China’s intellectual property theft and breach of trade regulations. While taking advantage of international trade, China maintains its shady connections with enemies of the international community, such as Iran and North Korea, and HK has played an pivotal role as an intermediary. The reason why HK can intermediate between the West and these shady links is not that HK is particularly brilliant, but because of the differential treatment it receives from the international community and, in other words, their belief in the One-Country-Two-Systems doctrine.

The international community has now realized that their tolerance is the root cause for HK’s infiltration of the international trade order, and so it’s not hard to imagine how HK will be treated by the international community in the near future. For example, as China has instilled a credit system to spy on and control their citizens, they would need to import spy cameras, for which HK is the transport hub. When the West has imposed an embargo on sensitive materials to China due to the outbreak of human rights crisis in regions like Xinjiang, there is no way Hong Kong can stay out of the embargo list. In another example, having breached trade regulations by doing business with Iran, ZTE had to accept direct management by the US to avoid going bust altogether. We will see HK receiving similar punishment very soon.

Moreover, the trade of raw materials to and from North Korea, as well as money laundering, were all done through more than 160 HK’s shell companies with North Korean background; selling oil to North Korea also involved HK shipping companies.

Void as it might seem, human rights remain a powerful pretext for certain actions. In 2017, German firearm manufacturer Heckler & Koch suddenly refused to sell MP5 submachine guns to the HK Police Force, as the German government had made a requirement in 2015 that all firearm manufacturers must assess the buyer’s level of corruption and democracy before selling, due to the worries that these firearms would be used by dictatorships to oppress their people.
Another less obvious reason for this is that the West is worried about leakage of sensitive and strategic materials, such as weapons, as well as steppers that are used to manufacture CPUs, into countries like Iran or China, through the help of intermediaries. An experienced intermediary, it is no wonder that HK is becoming less and less popular amongst the international community.
How did the HKers respond to this, then? Elites like Alan Leong would never stop preaching the same old drivel, claiming that the One-Country-Two-Systems doctrine remains intact, and that HKers stand the same common ground of democracy, freedom and human rights with the free world, and therefore the differential treatment ought to continue. Nice as they might seem, foreign politicians, of course, have their own agendas. Whereas democracy and freedom are but an empty promise, conflict of interest is the real deal. As HK moves from a free city to an accomplice to China’s dirty work, the One-Country-Two-Systems doctrine stops being the glory of the world, but a backdoor to the political and economic order of the world.
As a backdoor is a gateway through which a system is invaded, how would any knowing computer engineer not try to block it?
All these years, the politicians who tried to lobby in the US put all their emphasis on the One-Country-Two-Systems doctrine. From a Western perspective, isn’t this some sort of circus act all these years? On one hand, the West knows HK has become China’s handyman and is doing damage to the world order; whereas on the other, they keep hearing these blokes from HK emphasizing on how high-degree autonomy they enjoy and how the One-Country-Two-Systems promise remains intact. “Is this a joke?”
Technically and factually speaking, HK IS China’s handyman. If HKers want the free world to help maintain the One-Country-Two-System promise on one hand, AND want to keep the differential treatment such as low tariffs and qualification recognition on the other, how would that be different from asking the free world to grab a knife and stab themselves? In fact, the more HKers emphasize on the existence of the One-Country-Two-Systems doctrine, and the less HKers are willing to admit the fact that it has been defeated and that it has surrendered, the more would HK register as a sleeper cell on the radar of the international community.
To maintain the willful belief that the One-Country-Two-Systems doctrine as the common ground between HKers and the international community, mainstream HKers have refused to look at the reality and, essentially, have been living a lie for all these years. The only concern for the West is this: Aren’t you guys all involved in hacking the order of international trade? You took all the privileges given to you by the international community, hacked into the system as a handyman, THEN came back to us, demanding we tolerate you despite all the damages you’ve done, AND continue giving you the differential treatment as well?
It is self-centred for the HKers to only want their business and professional services (also businesses) to continue to foster. From a foreign perspective, as China and HK have successfully merged as a whole, the denying of the merge and demanding of differential treatment means HKers only want to enjoy all the rights without fulfilling any obligations. Just like China.
What do we have to do in the face of such a hostile environment outside? For starters we need “civil diplomats”. Opinion leaders need to stop living in denial, and need to plead the truth to the international community, that HK has completely fallen and its autonomy has suffered a total loss; that HKers, however, like the international community, are victims of the One-Country-Two-Systems lie as well as the Chinese tyranny; and that all the damages done to the international community had been done by China, hijacking the name of HK. We HKers need to free ourselves and cast off the yoke of bondage known as the game of elections, and stop telling foreigners all we wanted was the status quo. Embracing the status quo means HK WILL be punished alongside China.
HKers need to sever the ties with China as soon as possible, whereby we at least need another way of civil diplomacy, to tell the international community and our allies our true opinion: HKers do NOT wish to be an accomplice for China’s attempt to dominate the world, which is why HKers ardently seek true autonomy through independence. This is not only to benefit HKers themselves. It is only when HKers obtain true autonomy and set boundaries can HK stop being the threat to the international order.
HKer’s primary perception of the world is that freedom and democracy have to be mentioned hand-in-hand with the One-Country-Two-Systems doctrine. At the end of the day, HKers didn’t want to offend China and would like to remain as China’s handyman on one hand, meanwhile also wanting to remain as an ally of the West on the other. The fact that China took an action against a foreign journalist means that it has used HK as a pawn. The colonial master known as China has decided to sacrifice HK, and HK, as a subordinate, never had a chance to make a difference even if it chooses to side with its master. As we refused to choose whether to jump off the sinking ship or to remain on board, we’d still have to face the fact that the ship IS going to sink anyway.
The problem for HK is not that it doesn’t want to side with the West; it’s that it doesn’t get the opportunity to do so. As Pence made his speech, Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen immediately thanked the US for having the “moral courage” to speak up for Taiwan. Ties between US and Taiwan has been increasingly close these years, and an “Abandon-HK-Keep-Taiwan” policy has almost reached a consensus.
It is virtually impossible for HK to safeguard its own interest and values with its own existing system, and with the One-Country-Two-Systems doctrine, it renders it virtually impossible to seek help from foreign allies as well. To respect the One-Country-Two-Systems doctrine is to let China do whatever they like, and HK is doomed to be the backdoor China uses to hack the rest of the world.
5 months before, Alan Leong discussed HK politics at Asia Society, and all of a sudden he started to defend China (footage starting at 13:54), claiming that if the US had believed China to be in breach of the trade protocols, they should seek to resolve their differences within the framework of WTO, and they shouldn’t expect China to play by the rules if US had started a trade war, because by doing so would make China steer further away from democratic values. To Americans, this act is but defending this rogue regime. Didn’t you want democracy and autonomy for starters?
Fast forward to 5 months later. Pence made a stinging speech about all the crimes China had committed against the US and the world as a whole, including, on a domestic level, suppressing human rights and freedom of speech, and on an international level, influencing American elections, stealing confidential information from American companies, forced technology transfer, using “debt-trap diplomacy” against Belt-and-Road countries, and militarizing the South China Sea, to name a few. NONE of these conflicts can be resolved within the WTO framework, and as the US has made clear that they do not intend to do so, as they are seeking to establish multi-lateral trade relations anew.
Pence’s speech has rendered Leong’s defense a joke, as it has shown the extent how HK politics has lost touch with reality.
In his speech, Pence did mention Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, North and South Korea, South China Sea, as well as countries in the Belt and Road Initiative, leaving HK behind. Obviously, it is because HK has been so pro-China for such a long time that it stops showing up on the radar of the international community. Starting from Martin Lee fighting for the US to treat China as a most favoured nation after the Tiananmen massacre, to Alan Leong’s defense for China at Asia Society, HK politics has remained as pedantic as ever.
Whereas we never expected anything radical to come out of these politicians in fancy suits whose main concern is getting elected; had they stayed distant from China and treated them like an adversary (even if it was just a pretense), it would have made a huge difference in perception. Few people could tell the difference between defending HK and defending China. When they beg the US for their mercy to spare HK in the trade war, while ALSO saying good things about China at the same time, isn’t this revealing of their true desire to remain as a two-faced handyman, but with different wordings?
Then, if the international community forgets about HK, how would this be China’s responsibility at all? It is this entire generation of HKers who couldn’t make sense of their own identity and position or, worse yet, deliberate two-faced free-riders that exemplify the old saying “those who insult themselves shall be insulted likewise”. As we enter a time of a black-and-white, all-or-nothing showdown between China and the US, being two-faced means getting slapped in both.

Tuesday, 11 September 2018

To Yiu-ming: HK's Fiscal Reserve Soon to Be in Hands of Beijing!

HK's Fiscal Reserve Soon to Be in Hands of Beijing!
Translated by HKCT, written by To Yiu-ming
Original: https://www.rfa.org/cantonese/commentaries/tym/com-09062018095716.html?encoding=traditional 

The astronomical fiscal reserve of the SAR government has done little to solve our social problems. As bad as that may be, it is merely a reflection of the perversion that is our political system. Yet if this humongous sum of taxpayers’ money were to be handed over to the state-owned enterprises, unexplained and unchecked, that would assail our tradition of insulating SAR’s finances from the Mainland government, further ruining Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy.

Financial Secretary Paul Chan recently revealed in a blog that the HKMA is talking to Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs) on investing in their overseas projects that yields stable returns as stockholders with part of Hong Kong’s trillion dollar fiscal reserves.

Ay, there’s the rub: Is such investment profitable? SOEs have a monopoly in their domestic market, and hence is fairly sheltered from failure. Investing in their shares when they come are justifiable if the price is right and the purchase well communicated. Yet what is proposed is significantly different: we only know that the investment will be into SOEs’ overseas projects, with no idea of what it entails. We do not even know which SOEs are involved, or the projects in question.

To be frank, profitable projects have no difficulty seeking capital investment. Risky projects would naturally yearn for SAR’s investment, yet should we really let patriotism cloud business acumen?

The next problem lies in the means of investment. The SAR Government is hoping to buy stock and wait for dividends. Unlike the Government’s current investment purchases, such as shares, foreign currency and bonds, which are all highly fungible. But for the Government to hold stock of a specific company is much riskier, and the stockholders’ rights is completely at the mercy of the company’s constitution, organization, and legal systems. In such cases, there is no guarantee of great dividends even if the company were to make great profits. 

The third problem lies in the nature of such investment. SOEs are hefty investors abroad; so of their projects are controversial, to say the least, involving the sales of arms or copyright infringements. Even if these projects were to yield great profits, the SAR government should still keep the moral dimension in mind. Not to mention, with the US-China trade war going on, the SAR Government ought to stay out of it and refrain from all commercial activities the US see as unfair trade practices; it might be even wiser to keep one’s distance from SOEs, so as to protect our status as a customs-free area.

Perhaps to the FS, it is within the HKMA’s own purview to manage its own investment portfolio. HKMA may choose SOEs as it chooses stocks and bonds. These actions are unworthy of a detailed account on the FS’ blog. Yet the three questions I have raised above are of great importance. Mishandling our investment and we suffer losses, or worse, find ourselves caught in the crossfire of the current trade war. With this in mind, how can the SAR’s clandestine practices bring assurance to anyone?

Of course, the bigger question lies in our fiscal reserve trickling into the hands of Mainland SOEs. What’s to follow? handing our reserve to the government or Guangdong or even the national development bank for them to manage like Macau did? With the decision-making process hidden from view, Hongkongers have no way of knowing where our fiscal reserve and the HKMA’s profit is spent. We may even end up with the Central Government taking over Hong Kong’s reserve, only to provide the SAR with an annual return of 4%. 

Now, of course, these worse case scenarios still require the consent of HKMA and the SAR Government, but since when was the last time the SAR Government ever said no to Beijing? 

Thursday, 5 July 2018

港督柏立基就職演說 Governor's speech at Inauguration Ceremony 23 Jan 1958

港督柏立基就職演說
*********

以下是港督柏立基爵士於1958123日在立法局會議室的就職演說全文(譯文):

  我對我的朋友周埈年爵士今晨對內子及我熱烈歡迎的盛意,表示感謝之忱。

  我倆極希望有回到我們曾感到愉快的地方的一天。我倆離開這一處地方,還不到三年,在我們乘坐飛機到達本港,及由九龍渡海前往維多利亞的時候,看到許多稔熟的建築物,及再看到老朋友,使我們同想到以往愉快的交遊,實在感到興奮。這對我倆乃是一種令人感動的經驗。

  女皇陛下已經賦予我以極大的責任。由於我有着一種隨時保障各位利益的私人强烈責任感,這一項責任更為加重我對於各位的歡迎,至感榮幸。同時我也知道一項事實,那就是我現在步武一位大人物如葛量洪爵士的後塵。葛量洪爵士在本港服務十年半,政績輝煌,最近才告任滿。我在他的任期內,曾經擔任輔政司三年,實感榮幸。我知道他的政策是什麼,及執行政策的責任感。我現在乘這一個最先的機會對各位保證:我在港督任內的宗旨,將努力保持葛量洪爵士的行政的高水準,及倚賴各位的協助和合作,盡力為本港及其人民服務。

  各位將會覺得本人對於面臨的各項問題,已經有相當了解,本人在過去與各位一道處理所有問題的時候,期間很短,後來因為本人對香港的興趣與同情,所有一切發生的事情,以及各項計劃的執行與各方面的進展,都能經常獲得消息。所謂各方面的進展,包括衛生、教育、住屋、公用事業及工商業等等。同時,本人對於某數項特別重要的問題,例如難民徙置問題的結果,亦甚了解。本人認為今後任務,甚為繁重,一般人民,如決心及智慧,低於香港人民,必感覺無法處理此項任務。但香港人民的優良品質,使本人獲得信心與鼓勵。本人深信:由於香港人民的智能與勤奮,我們必能保持過去的進展,並保證香港今後繼續繁榮。但是,如果想達到此項目的,我們必須一心一德,效忠香港,因為一個安全的香港,對於我們大家都非常重要。我們不能容許任何住在香港並以香港為家的人士,損壞此項安全或者損壞我們社會的支柱。

  今天上午,本人不想詳細講述各項問題,本人謹能向各位保證:在上帝佑護之下,本人將竭盡所能,為香港服務。同時,本人與內子對各位以及各位老朋友的熱烈歡迎,表示感謝,並表示本人與各位再度聚首的快慰,敬謝各位。


1958123日(星期五)
香港時間____
〔上述譯文由華僑日報於1958年1月24日刊出;應為政府預備譯文〕

港督葛量洪就職演說 Governor's speech at Inauguration Ceremony 25 Jul 1947

港督葛量洪就職演說
*********

以下是港督葛量洪於1947725日在娛樂戲院(King's Theatre)的就職演說全文(譯文):

摩士君、周埈年君,各位男女聚賓暨闔港民眾:

  余夫婦深感各位在余等今午抵埗時,及現在此院所賜予之熱誠歡迎,誠如歡迎詞中所述,余等並非首次來港,香港實乃余等之第二家鄉,余等在此結婚,在此渡過逾半之婚姻生活,在此消磨過愈半出仕後之歲月。故港中故舊甚多,今午在碼頭得重見不少舊友,快慰何似,余絕不懷疑在座不少余目為友人者,而余且希望其以友人待余。雖然余對香港並非陌生,余深知一九四七年之香港與余在一九三五年離別之香港迥異。現有問題殊多,而更又比以前者更困難。此複雜,匪獨本港為然,在今日之世界,即各地亦無不如是,不過程度有深淺而已。如萬物之最重要而極根本之糧食之缺少,吾人缺少米、麥、糖及肉類物資之缺少——吾人缺少木材,鋼鐵及水坭。再有人力之缺乏——吾人缺少工程師、醫生、教師、技術人員及金錢。

  余所述目前所缺少者影响最大,尤以住屋建設為甚。在過去數月,余曾漫游各國,而在各國住屋均為嚴重問題。在南太平洋、澳洲、新西蘭、印度、加拿大、美國,不錯,甚至英國——及英本土亦以住屋問題為棘手。其次教育亦受影响,教師與學校同感不足。健康交通亦受牽連。設計建造機場之人材何在,建築之材料,及經費何在,人方物力缺少之結果,生活程度因以高漲。世界各地多受政治不安之影响,香港幸免此禍,且正如歡迎詞中有言,香港將設立市政府,向民政之前途邁進,而再有或被忽畧之另一進步即在立法局中以非官守議員佔多數。如是各位可謂余曾過于强調吾人面臨之困難,余指出困難,同時並不在以之作藉口,而可歛手嘆息謂:「工作過于艱巨,無法應付」。反之,吾認為一切困難實為對吾人殫精竭慮以赴之一種挑釁。

  同時余感覺吾人亦須知世界其他地方亦有其困難問題,一如吾人然。不過吾人對于一切困難問題,須認清楚其屬于世界件,但吾人之家庭,須由吾人自己收拾。吾人不宜試行解決其他人之困難,蓋此非吾人能力所能及,吾人須集中於吾人之困難問題,吾人須實行自助,然後可使英國所負之責任,畧可減輕,同時,吾人於自力更生中,更應與吾人之有力朋友與鄰人——中國——竭誠密切合作,共同努力。香港之復興,顯具成績,吾在若干國家中,輒聽得一般曾遊香港目擊實情之人士作讚美之評述。吾相信此反映出吾之前任者楊慕琦爵士及香港全體人民之偉大功績。

  今日吾不欲詳細討論吾人當前之各種工作,吾欲他日詳為研究,但吾敢保証决不拖延,吾亦石欲列舉吾人所須處理之各種困難問題,但有一事,余須提出者,則為香港大學。吾認為此係最重要之事,香港大學應成為世界上之第一流文化機關,摩斯先生、周埈年先生及諸位,曾許吾以合作,吾極樂於接受。微君等之助,吾實束手無策。最後,吾謹以一句話結束吾詞:「吾人一起向前,表現工作與合作所能有之成就,以創造香港之光榮模範。」


1947725日(星期五)
香港時間____
〔上述譯文由華僑日報於1947年7月26日刊出;當時譯名為賈乃咸〕

港督尤德就職演說 Governor's speech at Inauguration Ceremony 20 May 1982

港督尤德就職演說
********

以下是港督尤德爵士於1982520日在大會堂的就職演說全文(譯文):

夏鼎基爵士、鍾士元爵士:

  兩位對本人的稱譽給各位給予內子和本人的熱烈歡迎,本人衷心銘感。本人剛才宣誓就任總督及三軍總司令,能擔任這職位,我深感榮幸和自豪。本人認識到這職位在良好管治和對香港市民福利方面,負有極大的責任。本人保證定必全力以赴,盡忠職守。

  香港人有許多可引以自豪的成就。在競爭劇烈的世界中,本港工商界的進取精神和勞工的技能及勤奮,已為本港帶來繁榮和成功。因而提供了資源得以在各方面已獲致驕人的成就:為迅速增長的人口建造房屋,推廣教育,改善醫療和社會的服務,促進康樂和文化活動,和建設優良的運輸設施。由於立法局的擴大和在區議會設立民選議席,居住在本港的市民有更大的途徑去表達自己的意願。香港已由一個平凡的海港發展為一個龐大現代化的城市,足以與世界其他大城市媲美。本人藉此機會要向曾為這改變作出貢獻的所有人士致敬,特別要向前任總督致敬,他的卓越貢獻已獲得廣泛的認識。

  自本人三十年前第一次到達香港以來,香港確有顯著的進步,但等待要做的工作應多。在不斷改變的世界中,沒有任何社會可以或應該停滯不前。本人到達之時,正值很多重要計劃在進行中,市民都期望這些計劃會帶來改善,使香港成為他們可以安居樂業並且感到自豪的城市。本人並將努力不懈,促進這些計劃的實現。支持這些計劃需要保持經濟增長,同時要使參與促成這增長的一切人士都可完全發揮他們的衝勁和進取精神。

  要達到這目的,香港需要對將來有信心。由於有租約存在,現時提出這問題實不足為奇。我相信我們大有理由保持信心,而徵兆都是良好的。英國政府對香港和港人利益的承擔仍然堅決。中國與本港的關係從未有將目前這樣友善,而很多事情都有來這良好的關係。如果有一件事要注意和仍需更加努力的,就是對繼續保持本地區繁榮和安定的極端重要性要有共同的認識,和加以維護的共同願望。因此我認為保持高度信心是有良好理由的。

  世界現正面臨經濟困難時期,過程可能非常艱苦,但本港曾一再表現不論在順境或逆境中都能生存和繁榮。在這努力中,政府在自己的工作中必須和私營部門衷誠合作。

  在所有這些事情中,本人深知多麼需要行政局的意見和立法局的支持。鍾士元爵士應允我將獲得非官守議員的支持,我特此致謝。政府也將依賴市政局、各區議會,和眾多的諮詢委員會所擔任極端重要的任務,他們作出了重大的貢獻使政府有效率,和對本港市民的利益有所反應。我渴望和全體公務員共同工作,我深知他們的超卓質素,我在此向夏鼎基爵士所表示的支持致謝。

  本人忝為總督,得到各位的支持和指導,負有領導政府執行多方面工作的責任。我再次向各位保證:本人定必全力以赴,務求使各項工作成功,並且努力為本港市民謀求福利繁榮,使香港的前途充滿光明。


1982520日(星期五)
香港時間____
〔上述譯文由香港工商日報於1982年5月21日刊出,應為政府新聞處準備〕

港督麥理浩就職演說 Governor's speech at Inauguration Ceremony 19 Nov 1971

港督麥理浩就職演說
*********

以下是港督麥理浩爵士於19711119日在大會堂的就職演說全文(譯文):

頃蒙布政司羅樂民、羅理基爵士及關祖堯爵士三位分別致辭歡迎,善頌善禱,殊為感謝,本人及內子此次來港,甫履斯境,即蒙各界人士熱誠款待,高誼盛情,感謝至深。本人夫婦同香港闊別多年,今日重臨舊地,欣悅之情,不言而喻。

香港發展一日千里,可謂燦然有成,其間不同種族人士,聚居於此,和睦共處,衷誠合作,尤為難得,凡此種種,本人在各地均聞人津津樂道,此次本人幸而委為香港總督,亦覺與有榮施。

至於確保地方安寧,以及謀求居民利樂,現已交由本人肩負其責。本人深知是項責任異常重大,前任總督戴麟趾爵士乃吾摯友,其在任內領導有方,政績斐然。茲值接任之際,謹對其歷年維護香港利益之決心,與乎不屈不撓之精神,深表敬意。

以前本人雖然迭有造訪香港,惟自一九六二年以來,未嘗在港居住。今者舊地重臨,早料香港面貌與前不同。事實上,統計專家亦曾證明香港有極大之轉變,舉例而言,經濟活動之進展,已達當年之三倍;電力之消耗量亦達三倍;而銀行存款數額則更達四倍之多。本人今日渡海途中,目睹工廠與大廈數目數倍於疇昔。香港僅為區區一殖民地,港人以其勇敢才智,克服時艱而為各地人士所慕响。今者香港已躋身於世界大都市之列,為世界重要之工商業中心,亦為重要港口,旅遊中心及交通樞紐。其發展之速,無與倫比。類此美譽,不可勝數。現本人之首要工作,乃務求目前之發展繁榮,得以不斷增進,蓋吾人必須先求經濟繁榮,然後始可以言將來之一切期望。

數星期來,跡象顯示世界有等地區,尤其是港之主要海外銷場,再行採取措施以保當地工業;是以對香港及其他許多地區之繁榮,亦有所威脅。本人但願此種令人憂慮之現象,祗屬暫時性質;並說世界各國隨即恢復為自由之貿易政策,蓋二十五年來,世界經濟發展之突飛猛進,實賴貿易自由;故為香港利益計及進而為全球利益計,自由貿易之原則實有維持之必要。

香港經濟,日更向榮,故市民除基本生計外,亦有餘力改善其生活環境,香港在其他方面亦已有長足進展,本人希望能聽取關於各種進步及促成此種進步之政策之意見。尤其是關於如房屋、醫務、社會福利、教育與工業教育問題,以及在未來歲月中,應如何實行此等政策與其他新訂之政策等,以期增進市民之福利。

吾人之目標,乃謀求社會繁榮與進步。本人深知,此項目標之達成,端賴香港居民之信心,而此項信心,則祗在健全政府、安定政局及良好治安下方能獲致。頃聞各界人士對社會上邇來所發生之犯法行為深表關切,本人於此亟欲知道,究竟目前正在討論何種對策以求改善。本人深知問題之解決殊非容易,其實際情形與許多其他大城市者無別,當然,解決辦法尤在有責任感之人士與政府之一體通力合作。

今日本人履新,適逢世局劇轉,尤以太平洋地區益甚。此種形勢,對香港有利,其主要特點在對國際間之現實加以接受。由於此點,該區內彼此之間之關係得以更為和緩而互受其惠。本人深信,香港在此種新形勢下,將可繼續獲得繁榮與進展,而港人之技術與才智,定能不斷尋求新出路,使社會更加獲益,從而使市民生活獲進一步之改善,俾終有一日,幾可令香港四週山光水色之美景、互相輝映。

本人之目標,非祗求目睹之發展進度得以保持,並致力策勵政府與社會全體、百尺竿頭更進一步,俾眾人均覺得香港為一生活更見美好之地方,在未來歲月中,本人定當向此目標邁進。


19711119日(星期五)
香港時間____
〔上述譯文由華僑日報於1971年11月20日譯出〕

Governor's speech at Inauguration Ceremony
******************************************
Following is the speech delivered by the Governor, Sir Murray MacLehose, at the Inaugural Ceremony at City Hall on November 19, 1971:

I am most grateful for the general remarks of Sir Hugh, Sir Albert and Sir Cho-yiu. Your remarks and the reception we have received since we landed have deeply touched my wife and myself. It is indeed wonderful to come home to Hong Kong again after all these years.

I am proud to have been appointed to the governorship of this colony. It has been impressed on me in my travels how well-known and respected Hong Kong is throughout the world for its success, and for the happy example which it presents of multi-racial operations.

I realize the weight of responsibility for its well-being that now devolves on me. I am profoundly conscious of how well my friend and predecessors, Sir David Trench, bore his responsibility; and on taking up this office. I would like to pay tribute to the determination with which he upheld the interests of the Colony.

Though I have visited Hong Kong at fairly regular intervals, I have not lived here since 1962. I have no illusions that Hong Kong to which I now return is the same as that I used to know. The statisticians have explained, for example, that since then economic activity has trebled, consumption of electricity has trebled, and bank deposits have quadrupled.

As I crossed the harbour today, I could see for myself that factories and great buildings have multiplied. It has always been a Colony which has earned admiration for the success, courage and ingenuity with which it has faced and overcome great problems.

Now it has taken its place as one of the great cities in the world, a manufacturing and trading centre of very considerable international significance, a growth area which is without parallel, a port and communications and tourists centre of importance — one could continue the list indefinitely.

My first task will be to do all I can to ensure that this growth and expansion continue. Economic prosperity provides the only foundation on which all our hopes for the future can be built.

In the past few weeks there have been worrying signs that protectionism, especially in our main market, has re-emerged in the world and threatens our prosperity and that of many others. It is my fervent hope that this phase will prove temporary, and that the world will return to comparatively liberal trading conditions. It is such conditions which have fostered the extraordinary rapid growth of economic activity in the world in the last 25 years.

It is in the highest interest of Hong Kong, indeed it is in the highest interest of the world, that they should be maintained.

As Hong Kong has become more prosperous, it has been possible to look beyond the bare necessities of existence and devote more resources to improving conditions of life. Great strides have been made. I look forward to hearing more about these developments and the policies behind them, particularly those concerning housing, medical services, social welfare and education including, of course, technical education, and how they and other policies to be developed can show increased benefits to the people of the Colony in the next few years.

Our object is prosperity with social progress. I am very conscious of the fact that this can only be based on the confidence generated by sound administration, political stability and, above all, law and order. I have heard of concern about recent trends in the observance of law and order. Here again, I look forward to hearing what policies are planned to bring about an improvement.

I fully realize that in Hong Kong this problem is as complex as it is in most other great cities, and that solutions are not easy. Certainly in finding them the active cooperation of all responsible people is vital.

I arrive at a period of rapid change in the world, and, in particular, in the Pacific area. Hong Kong can only benefit from the new situation. Its main characteristic is recognition of the facts of international life and this should encourage calmer and more productive relations in the area.

I am confident that Hong Kong will continue to flourish and grow in this new climate, to find new outlets and new profit for the skill and ingenuity of the people, and to improve the conditions of their life. One day let them more nearly match the beauty of the sea and mountains that surround us.

It will be my purpose not only to maintain our present level of development but also to encourage both Government and the community to further progress so that the people of Hong Kong will find it an even better place to live in.

This, ladies and gentlemen, will be my object in the years ahead.

Ends/Friday, November 19, 1971
Issued at HKT __:__

NNNN

Monday, 11 June 2018

Edward Leung: Before the Sentencing

Before the Sentencing
Translated by HKCT, written by Edward Leung TIn-kei 梁天琦 (on 10 June 2018)
Original: https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=448387942240714&id=172224869857024 

Before I returned to Hong Kong, I once read a news report about the tendency of Hongkongers in recent years to emigrate. The poll showed that more and more Hongkongers are moving abroad. Among youngsters, an overwhelming majority considered emigration. At the same time, some “dignitaries” said that if youngsters are so dissatisfied with the society and feel pessimistic about the future, they can choose to leave. After reading these two articles, I felt perplexed: what environment are we creating for our next generation in this place?

To leave or to stay is, of course, a choice many have to make. If Hongkongers - especially the younger generation - no longer remain in Hong Kong and move elsewhere, then the future of Hong Kong will thus be cast. On the other hand, if we stick to this piece of land, then it is possible to change the future. Hong Kong will no longer be a “floating city”.

Of course, the reality makes us dejected. We all have our difficulties.

Since the hearing, time has rewound to the night of 8 February two years ago. Sometimes it pauses, sometimes it stops. My world reconnects with that night again, then stagnates, and I believe it will likely stay there for some time.

After four months of captivity, life isn't too bitter. I am most grateful to friends who attended hearings and wrote to me. Whenever I recall the scene in the courtroom: defense lawyers in front, familiar or unacquainted faces in the public gallery, every nod, smile and wave - these all bolstered my courage to face everything. Especially your letters. These are my only connections beyond the tall wall. These warm my heart a lot. This compassion reminds me of why I engage myself in politics.

Lives can influence lives. When I was about to give my statement to the court, I tried to trace my footsteps from the very beginning to today. I remember whom I met on the journey. From day one, the impetus pushing me to the field of politics is the pursuit of a democratic and free Hong Kong. During the course of seeking this ideal society, we have witnessed different scenes, had our own experiences and made our judgments. Regardless of how we make our choices, it is unavoidable that we encounter bumps if we want Hong Kong to become democratic. Coming to today, I don't expect others to agree with me, but I hope they have basic understanding about how an unrepresentative political system can spark the public’s anger; and how many political upheavals will be driven by failed constitutional reform. If we are staying here, the wellbeing of Hong Kong ought to be closely linked to every one of us. What is more, a democratic entity that can fully reflect public opinion should be our pursuit.

Talking about democracy or constitutional reform at this very moment may sound cliché or like asking for the moon. True, all great ideals sound ludicrous in front of a ridiculous reality. I do not deny the stark fact of the retrogression of the democratic course in Hong Kong. I just think that at the worst times, people's sense of responsibility becomes more important. We truly have a lot of things we ought to do but have not yet done.

When raising an issue in the community, support and opposition will inevitably appear. The divergence will manifest itself in different ways. By the same token, even with the ideal of making a difference in the society, social movement participants will also diverge or split due to different priorities. Before democracy is realized, perhaps we should put democracy in practice, understand all kinds of differences and cherish them. We should treat them as an opportunity to bring together a larger force. Only autocracy forbids dissenting voices.

From the turbulence in recent years, I learnt a lot of lessons that have been written down on paper. I have to thank all the people whom I met, especially my parents who brought me into this world. I think even with my entire life, I cannot repay them enough. But if I can learn today's lesson and keep striving for the future of our next generation, I believe my parents will be glad.


10 June 2018

Tuesday, 5 June 2018

Letter from David Ford to Civil Servants of Hong Kong on 16 June 1989

Letter from David Ford to Civil Servants of Hong Kong on 16 June 1989
布政司霍德1989年6月16日致全體公務員的信
Translated by Chinese Language Authority, Civil Service Branch, written by David Ford
霍德撰寫、銓敍科中文公事管理局譯

(In June 2018, a Facebook page Rufixation posted this letter, which was found in a former government department office. With authorization, we have typed the full text in English and Chinese for people to refer upon in the future.)
(2018年6月,Facebook專頁荒凝止息張貼這封在前政府部門辦公室找到的信件。經授權,我們將英文及中譯本打出,以供日後有需要人士參考引錄。)



Dear Colleague,

At this time, we in the civil service share with the community as a whole a profound feeling of shock and grief at the recent bloodshed in Peking. I am sure that you, like most people in Hong Kong, are watching with the concern the way in which the situation in China develops. We must all hope that the moves to modernize and liberalize China will be given fresh impetus in the years ahead.

Despite their anger the people of Hong Kong have reacted to recent events in China with tremendous dignity and restraint. This is particularly so in the case of the civil service and my purpose in writing to you is to thank you all for your dedication and responsibility in these troubled times. You have continued to provide the community with a standard of service of a level of which you can be proud, while at the same time demonstrating solidarity with the rest of the people of Hong Kong. Your loyalty to Hong Kong and all it stands for is highly appreciated.

The tragedy of recent weeks makes the role of the civil service even more important to the future of Hong Kong. There may be difficult times ahead, but we have faced difficult times before. No matter what the problems, Hong Kong has shown an ability to adapt and bounce back unequalled anywhere. I have no doubt that we shall do so again.

It would be pointless to suggest that what has happened has not had a major effect on confidence in the future of Hong Kong. I know that you must be deeply concerned. But this makes it all the more necessary for us, as civil servants, to work towards ensuring a stable, and prosperous Hong Kong both up to and beyond 1997. One thing that has emerged from this present situation is a unity of purpose in Hong Kong. We cannot go back, we can only go forward, plan ahead and build for the future. In going forward our duty and commitment is to Hong Kong and its people.

I realise of course that in difficult times it is the civil service that is in the front line, that it is that civil service who may bear the brunt of the community's concerns, and that it is the civil service to which many people time for leadership, guidance and help. I have set that confidence in the future of Hong Kong has been seriously affected; what has not been affected is the confidence in the civil service; its sense of duty and dedication and its commitment to serve the people of Hong Kong.

Yours sincerely,

David Ford

Chief Secretary

中譯本

香港布政司署
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
HONG KONG

各位同事:

  在這個時刻,政府公務員亦與全港市民一樣,對於近日在北京所發生的流血事件,深深感到震驚和哀傷。相信各位也像本港大部分市民一樣,正密切注意中國國內局勢的發展。我們大家都希望促進中國現代化和開放的發展,在未來數年會有新的動力。

  雖然香港人對中國最近發生的事件,感到憤怒,但卻極能保持自重和克制。公務員的表現,更是如此。各位在這個令人不安的時期,依然緊守崗位,全心全意地工作,實在值得讚揚。我這封信,就是要向各位致謝。各位不但繼續為市民提供一貫的優良服務,同事亦不忘與市民緊密團結在一起。各位一直為香港忠誠服務,我們對此深為感激。

  最近幾個星期所發生的慘劇,使公務員在香港前途方面所擔當的角色更形重要。前路可能是困難重重,但我們以往也經歷過艱苦的時刻。無論是甚麼困難,香港都能夠順應時勢,迅速復原。這方面的表現,確是舉世無雙的。我深信我們可以順利地再次渡過難關。

  倘若說最近發生的事件,並沒有重大影響港人對香港前途的信心,實在是沒有意思的。我知道各位一定對此深表關注。不過,對我們公務員來說,就更需要努力工作,確保香港在一九九七年前後,能夠保持穩定繁榮。現時的情況使香港全體市民有堅定一致的目標。我們不能後退,只能向前邁進,為將來制定計劃,進行建設。在向前邁進時,我們須盡忠職守,竭力為香港和全體市民服務。

  我清楚了解到困難時刻來臨時,站在前線的就是公務員。你們首當其衝,要承擔市民的擔憂;而很多市民亦希望公務員會給他們提供領導、指引和幫助。我剛才說,港人對香港前途的信心受到嚴重影響;但他們對公務員的信心卻未有動搖。他們深信公務員仍會竭盡本分,盡心盡力為香港市民服務。

布政司 霍德
一九八九年六月十六日